Individual wrote:... which I think falls under the phrase "post-mortem continuance." That phrase seems like a synonym for reincarnation. There is continuance of causality, but not personality

I coined the phrase "post-mortem continuance" particularly to demonstrate what I have bolded in your post above. The words "rebirth" and "reincarnation" both suggest there is something to "re"... which seems to be the thrust of Buddhadasa Bhikkhu's objections which I quoted above.

Indeed there is no "re", but that doesn't mean that the causal aspect of the four mental aggregates which continued throughout life suddenly cease to have corresponding effects, simply because what we conventionally call "death" has occurred.

Buddhadasa Bhikkhu's concern seemed to be that views of rebirth and reincarnation had the potential to blind people from the reality of anatta.

I doubt it. In "The heartwood of the Bodhi tree" he talks about how to train to maximise the possibility of becoming an Arahant at the point of death. The whole development in that chapter would be a little pointless if he was denying that there is no causal continuation.

Well there we go... that firmly places the onus on those who claimed Buddhadasa Bhikkhu denied any form of post-mortem continuance to find real evidence (i.e. not just out of context snippets) to back up their claims.

Respectfully, I think some people must read more things of Buddhadhasa before these precipitated judices.

Those of yours who claim Buddhadhasa is overly intellectual, please compare in this thread viewtopic.php?f=24&t=1764&p=23134#p23134 the texts cited by some people with that from Buddhadhasa cited by myself. What is the more intellectual approach?

This cite: "It happens often and continuously, but there is no rebirth. There is no such thing, in reality, as rebirth or reincarnation" is not the deny of rebirth but the deny of a concrete (and widely spread) understanding of rebirth. When one is able to understand that explanation rebirth is not a subject to be affirmed or denied.

ask:

- How rebirth can be possible when there is not a self to continue?- How non-rebirth can be possible when finally there is not a self to die?.

Paticcasamuppada is a deep teaching. Buddhadhasa was able to develop two levels for the explanation. One level is what he named of "Dhamma language". Another level is the common view, in where arises the discussion about rebirth or non.rebirth. One need read and study Buddhadhasa carefully before talking about his teaching.

On my side, I think one must be always far to judge the teaching of wise people with the feeling of being in a supermarket, choosing this or that, to satisfy our intellectual pleasures. Instead that, one must look this wisdom assortment like the sick person inside a medical store: luckily here there is a good assortment of medicines. What medicine can be good for my illness?. We can take the pill if we don't like suppositories but we cannot add doubts over the rest that we don't know neither we have tested.

Yes that's the part of "Heartwood of the Bodhi Tree" I was thinking of:

...Let that feeling of volunteering for the remainderless extinction, that readiness to accept it be a partner of the mind until the very end. With this skilful means the mind will be able to dissolve itself into the emptiness that is Nibbana. This is the practice at the moment of physical death for those of little knowledge. With it an unlearned grandma or granddad can reach the final extinction. We call it the skilful means of turning a fall from a ladder into a measured leap....To die in the right way we must be brave with Dhamma, and die having victory over death, die realizing emptiness in the last second of life. Please remember well, there is an opportunity right up to the last moment....Emptiness is present in all things; it is their characteristic. If the mind is empty of grasping at and clinging to all things, then it is itself emptiness, the remainderless extinction of 'I' and 'mine' and there is no more birth.

I think you are misunderstanding what I meant about Ajahn Buddhadasa. I did not mean "intellectual" in a negative sense, and I certainly didn't say "overly intellectual". I meant that his speaking/writing is quite complex and carefully reasoned out. Because it is like that it is useful to study it carefully, not just pull out "sound bites" (as I just did ).

[In my opinion, sound bites of Ajahn Chah are generally useless too, but for a different reason. For Ajahn Chah context is incredibly important, and his talks seem to be extremely focussed on the particular audience. I don't get that feeling from Ajahn Buddhadasa - I do not get the impression that his teachings are such a direct "reaction" to the particular situation as with Ajahn Chah.]

for me the 2 buddhadasa sides are element who claims he denied rebirth outright and santikaro who lived with him who claims he believed in rebirth but was just not a believer in the old 3 lifetimes model and if you read his reasons i have to agree with buddhadasa, buddhaghosa's 3 lifetimes model seems to me and it seemed to buddhadasa to deny the possability of ever ending samasara cause you always have this future life where kamma plays out so you could never find nibbana in this life only in a future life, which is much like a carrot leading a horse, he never gets the carrot just keeps going forward. also buddhadasa was very insistent on all suffering being boiled down to a belief in me, and mine or what is basicaly a self (atta). its a very fine line to walk because it can easily make one slide off into the sorts of arguments we see about denying rebirth etc.

สัพเพ สัตตา สุขีตา โหนตุ

the mountain may be heavy in and of itself, but if you're not trying to carry it it's not heavy to you- Ajaan Suwat

jcsuperstar wrote:buddhaghosa's 3 lifetimes model seems to me and it seemed to buddhadasa to deny the possability of ever ending samasara cause you always have this future life where kamma plays out so you could never find nibbana in this life only in a future life

jcsuperstar wrote:buddhaghosa's 3 lifetimes model seems to me and it seemed to buddhadasa to deny the possability of ever ending samasara cause you always have this future life where kamma plays out so you could never find nibbana in this life only in a future life

That is the stupidest thing I've ever heard.

Probably not the most polite response possible to your statement, but if you would be so kind as to elaborate on what you mean by: " you always have this future life where kamma plays out so you could never find nibbana in this life only in a future life."

While the three life model is not explicitly found in the suttas, paticcasamuppada in the moment to moment model or the three life model is both circular and moves through time, past, present, and future. There is nothing in the three life model that denies kamma being made and coming to fruition in this life and doing so even moment to moment. The three life model certainly does not negate nibbana here and now, particularly cutting the links between feeling and craving. And the moment to moment model does not in any meaningful way negate paticcasamuppada being used to explain rebirth.

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723

>> Do you see a man wise[enlightened/ariya]in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<<-- Proverbs 26:12

if you read buddhadasa's explination it makes sense. but basically it states if the kamma we make has to be drawn out over 3 lives then you always have to have a future life, even if you stopped making kamma right now your past kamma from this life isnt gonna end till the next life so you still have 1 more life. or something like that. the main point is that if youre always working with three lives you cant end it in this life. but if youre not always working with 3 lives whats the point of a 3 life model?

สัพเพ สัตตา สุขีตา โหนตุ

the mountain may be heavy in and of itself, but if you're not trying to carry it it's not heavy to you- Ajaan Suwat

Hi mike, sorry, my comment was not because your comments. Anyway I include myself in the bad behaviour of supermarket, which is rooted in us from our childhood. In front many good things we tend to point to the "the best" disminishng the rest, and without reallizing all them are of value.

I'm with jcsuperstar in feeling the same brahmanist smell in Buddhaghosa. However, here in the West we don't have the same problems derived of the 3 lives scheme than we can check in the East. And without all that superstition associated with the 3 lives scheme, then also it can be useful to investigate some things. In example to deny the non-rebirth!!

jcsuperstar wrote:if you read buddhadasa's explination it makes sense. but basically it states if the kamma we make has to be drawn out over 3 lives then you always have to have a future life, even if you stopped making kamma right now your past kamma from this life isnt gonna end till the next life so you still have 1 more life. or something like that. the main point is that if youre always working with three lives you cant end it in this life. but if youre not always working with 3 lives whats the point of a 3 life model?

even if you stopped making kamma right now your past kamma from this life isnt gonna end till the next life so you still have 1 more life.

Following this line of thinking all kamma made in this life must be exhausted in this life, which is not too realistic.

Past kamma from 10 lives ago may play itself out in this life. Break the chain, there will be residual kamma, the body being part of that, but there is nothing further impelling one foward. There is no grasping after. Buddhism is not Jainism where kamma must be completely exhausted for there to be awakening.

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723

>> Do you see a man wise[enlightened/ariya]in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<<-- Proverbs 26:12

Following this line of thinking all kamma made in this life must be exhausted in this life, which is not too realistic

not so, what it implies is that it can be. not that its has to be. buddhadasa is saying the buddha said nibbana can be had here and now (at least in the buddha's time, if we want to argue over whether or not one can be an arahant now thats a different thread) and if this is true and one can skip out on samsara in this life time (not in the future one you have to be in next for your kamma to play out) the 3 life times model is flawed.

สัพเพ สัตตา สุขีตา โหนตุ

the mountain may be heavy in and of itself, but if you're not trying to carry it it's not heavy to you- Ajaan Suwat

Following this line of thinking all kamma made in this life must be exhausted in this life, which is not too realistic

not so, what it implies is that it can be. not that its has to be.

That is the point. The Buddha's teaching is not about exhausting kamma. It is about cutting the link that impels us forward.

buddhadasa is saying the buddha said nibbana can be had here and now (at least in the buddha's time, if we want to argue over whether or not one can be an arahant now thats a different thread) and if this is true and one can skip out on samsara in this life time (not in the future one you have to be in next for your kamma to play out) the 3 life times model is flawed.

It is only flawed if you accept the Jain position of having to "exhaust" kamma. If I cut the link between vedana and tanha, no more kamma is created, and movement forward into the next life is ended. There is no need that whatever kamma made must be experienced.

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723

>> Do you see a man wise[enlightened/ariya]in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<<-- Proverbs 26:12

On reflection the three times, past, present and future adequately demonstrate that if kamma making is not brought to an end, clinging, craving and aversion will continue indefinitely irrespective of what body and mind it may be.

If Ven. Buddhadasa brought an end to all this ignorance and dukkha then he both was and is a successful rebirth denier.

For those who can observe they are still kamma making, the depiction of it as the compulsive pursuit of being and becoming is available in the present. What can be observed adequately demonstrates the nature of the problem. When ignorance is not defeated then even death will not free from ongoing cyclic being and becoming.

I don't have any problems with any of the Theravada Bhikkhu writers, east or west. I think they are all misunderstood at points. It gets sorted out in the long run. They have all taught me a lot. I'm very appreciative of all of it and I liked Buddhasasa's writing a lot.

Last edited by nathan on Fri Jul 10, 2009 7:45 am, edited 1 time in total.

jcsuperstar wrote:i bet somewhere there are heads spinning as i use buddhadasa to enforce my pro-rebith ideas... though you have to admit this is probably the most productive rebirth/buddhadasa thread in existance

Nyanatiloka wrote:Against Dr. Paul Dahlke's misconception of the paticcasamuppāda as;one single kammical moment of personal experience,; and of the 'simultaneity' of all the 12 links of this formula, I should like to state here distinctly that the interpretation of the p. given here as comprising 3 successive lives not only agrees with all the different schools of Buddhism and all the ancient commentaries, but also is fully identical with the explanations given already in the canonical suttas. Thus, for example, it is said verbatim in Nidāna-Samyutta S. XII, 51:;Once ignorance 1 and clinging 9 are extinguished, neither kammically meritorious, nor disadvantageous, nor imperturbable kammic-constructions 2=10 are produced, and thus no consciousness 3=11 will spring up again in a new mother's womb.; And further:;For, if consciousness were not to appear in the mother's womb, would in that case mentality and materiality 4 arise?; Cf. above diagram.

so youre saying it has to take place over three lives? cause if so you have to have that 3rd life no matter what you do now, even if you were the buddha youd have to live one more life to eat up that kamma unless the 3 life model is wrong. if you believe you can ge out of samsara without exhausting all your kamma then the 3 life model is wrong is what i'm saying. how can you have a 3 life model if you can get out of it 2nd life? or 1st whatever.

angullimala is the perfect example he clearly had to have created kamma in his last life that should have made for some pretty crappy future lives but he became an arhant, he didnt have to live a future life, he didnt have to experience that kamma played out over 3 lives. the model fails here.

สัพเพ สัตตา สุขีตา โหนตุ

the mountain may be heavy in and of itself, but if you're not trying to carry it it's not heavy to you- Ajaan Suwat

Hmm, I still don't get it. My understanding was that for an Arahant there is nothing to condition the next rebirth. That's what the quote I gave above seemed to be saying.

On the other hand, I think that saying that all aspects of the model need to be over three lives is probably an overinterpretation of what Buddhagosa was saying. Can someone point us to the specific section of the Visuddhimagga?